Local Level Poverty Monitoring System: An Approach to Involve Local People in PovertyApproach to Involve Local People in Poverty

Monitoring

Introduction

Poverty is multidimensional in nature and it hasPoverty is multidimensional in nature and it hasmultiple facets. Dimension of poverty varied so widelyit is essential to clarify the approaches of poverty

l i th i th fi di f t l ianalysis, otherwise the findings of poverty analysis maycarry wrong signal to the policy planners.

There are four approaches of analyzing poverty andthese are monetary approach, capability approach,social inclusion approach and participatory approach.social inclusion approach and participatory approach.

Under monetary approach, a poverty line is determinedby identifying minimum level of income for maintainingby identifying minimum level of income for maintainingminimum standard of living.

The capability approach considers competence of ap y pp pperson in terms of ability to lead a long life, to functionwithout chronic mobility, to be capable of reading andwriting and be capable to move from one area towriting, and be capable to move from one area toanother, which are essential to lead a decent life.

If people fail to participate in social activities of theirp p p pown environment they live in isolation from thecommunity and resulted to poor capability and lowincome which is considered under social exclusionincome, which is considered under social exclusionapproach.

Under participatory approach the poor themselvesUnder participatory approach the poor themselvesidentify the meaning of poverty and makerecommendations for influencing policy in accordancewith their own context

Broadly poverty is the outcome of weaky p yinstitutional arrangements, lack of access to thebasic services, weak governance, inability of aperson to harness the opportunities from marketperson to harness the opportunities from market,lack of capacity of a person to face the crisis, lackof infrastructure, lack of decent employment

i l k f h iopportunity, lack of purchasing power etc.

Causes of poverty also vary from one area toanother for that reason finding out the contextualanother for that reason finding out the contextualreason is essential for taking need-basedprogramme to solve the problem. To assess theimpact of programme on poverty reduction as wellas to track the dynamics of poverty, monitoring isvery much essential.very much essential.

For, monitoring poverty at the local level anexperimental project was undertaken inexperimental project was undertaken inBangladesh under the banner of Local LevelPoverty Monitoring System (LLPMS) with thetechnical and financial support of CommunityBased Poverty Monitoring System (CBMS),Philippines and International Developmentpp es a d te at o a e e op e tResearch Centre (IDRC)-Canada.

Background of Local Level Poverty Monitoring System

A research project was undertaken under MIMAP-Bangladesh to develop some indicators and methodologyfor monitoring poverty at the local level in 2001-2002.

On the basis of the experiences of four villagesOn the basis of the experiences of four villagesBangladesh Academy for Rural Developmentexperimented the indicators and methodology developed

d il t h i U i f M h d (W t)under pilot phase in one Union of Muhammadpur (West),Daudkandi Upazila, Comilla covering all villages in theyear of 2003-2006.y

The essence of the project was to feed the localgovernment authority at the grassroots level withrequired information for enabling them to assessrequired information for enabling them to assessthe poverty situation at the respective areas, takeneed based project or programme and serves the

d l itargeted population.

Approaches to Poverty Analysis under LLPMS:Approaches to Poverty Analysis under LLPMS:

Participatory approach was followed foranalyzing poverty under LLPMS. Poor peopleanalyzing poverty under LLPMS. Poor peopleidentified poverty from their own context andidentify poor on the basis of the criteriade eloped b them People feel that ph sicaldeveloped by them. People feel that physicaloutwards of living is self explanatory to identifythe poor and non poor.

Community people think that dependency mainlyon physical labor for livelihood, uncertainty inon physical labor for livelihood, uncertainty inincome, irregular flow of income, less incomethan the family requirement, frequent morbidity,lack of treatment capacity lack of marketablelack of treatment capacity, lack of marketableskill, illiteracy etc are the indicators of poverty.

Focused Group Dissuasion with the poor householdst th t t i thi l ki d it isuggests that poverty is something lacking and it is

inherited; as their forefathers were poor and lackedof material assets ultimately they did not get they y gopportunity to acquire skill for exploring their latentpotentiality. Day laborer felt that they are poor asthey don’t have other skills to survive as a resultthey don t have other skills to survive as a resultthey don’t have bargaining capacity with the wagerate.

The outcome of the poverty is isolation from thebenefit of modern society, inhuman behavior frombenefit of modern society, inhuman behavior fromthe society, anxiety, non-consultation, lack offreedom, dependency, near to hunger etc.

From the discussion with the community people andindividual household it is clear that poverty is asyndrome of disgraceful, which denies fulfilling theminimum needs of human being. These needs includesocial, economical and psychological.social, economical and psychological.

Conceptual Framework for Poverty Monitoring at Local Level

Poverty can be addressed through generating decentemployment opportunity increasing income throughemployment opportunity, increasing income throughinvolving them in productive works, developingcapacity to face crisis in a positive manner and huntingmarket opportunity, reducing adverse affect of seasonalvulnerability etc of a household.

Information is needed to identify the strategies forgenerating productive employment opportunity,augmenting production, increasing capability andg g p , g p yreducing vulnerabilities of the people in a given society.On the other hand for ensuring support services to thetargeted population efficiently and knowing the impacttargeted population efficiently and knowing the impactof poverty alleviation programme and policiesinformation are prerequisites.

Id tifi ti f i di t l t d tIdentification of some core indicators related to causesand output of poverty needs to be developed forassessing changes over the years in respective areas.g g y pCollecting information related to indicators, update theinformation regularly would facilitate to developinsights on the changes over the years of a specificinsights on the changes over the years of a specificindicators hence helps to identify course of action forthe development of people.

Process of Local Level Poverty Monitoring System

Setting Objective

Identification of Indicators and Nature of Data

Instrument of Data Collection

Data Processing

Validate information andDeveloping Nature of Data Collection p gDatabase

Compare the Indicators with same administrative

nitDisseminate the Identifying Course of unitinformation

Identifying Course of Action

Picture 01: Union Map with Infrastructure

Picture 02: Location of Wards

Picture 03: Enrollment Rate With Location of School

Picture 04: Location of Household in a Village

Picture 5: Location of Poor HouseholdsPicture 5: Location of Poor Households

MIMAP-CBMS GISList of Landless Household of a village

Household Age of HH Head Occupation of HH Head

104 35.0 Farmer

106 65.0 Farmer

107 30.0 Agricultural Labour

108 26 0 A i lt l L b108 26.0 Agricultural Labour

109 40.0 Agricultural Labour

11 18.0 Agricultural Labour

29 35 0 Business29 35.0 Business

6 35.0 Rickshaw Puller

Fi diFindings

Distribution of the Household According to Land Holding Size

19%

7% 0%

59%15%

Landless Marginal Small Medium Large

Incidence of Poverty According to Villagers Perception

Landless

Marginal Small Medium Large All

Very Poor 36.16 9.58 3.24 - - 22.17

Poor 40.53 31.61 11.65 1.57 - 29.84

Lower Middle Class 10.66 17.76 16.46 6.22 - 12.53

Middle Class 11.05 35.88 49.22 40.48 7.5 25.14

Rich 1.60 5.18 19.43 51.74 92.5 10.33

100 0 100 0Total 100.00 100.00

100.00 100.00 100

100.00

Landless Marginal Small Medium Large Total

Educational Attainment According to Land Holding Size

Landless Marginal Small Medium Large Total

Net Primary Enrolment Rate 76.85 89.12 93.1587.59 100.00 81.23

Primary Drop Out Rate 1.650.82

0.94 - -1.30

Net Secondary Enrolment Rate

27.3643.02

52.7558.64

87.5037.19

Secondary Drop Out Rate13.00 6.49 2.52 1.79

-7.56

Literacy Rate 7 Years Plus33.94 51.66 62.14 73.19

81.8246.28

Adult Literacy Rate 15 +Adult Literacy Rate 15 +36.98 56.73 66.16 77.48 84.62 50.84

Nature of Crisis Faced by Different Land Holding Category HH

Total

Landless Marginal Small Medium

Death of earned member .9% .5%

Expenditure for treatment 43.0% 37.5% 32.5% 31.8% 38.8%

Crop damage 40 2% 47 5% 60 0% 59 1% 47 4%Crop damage 40.2% 47.5% 60.0% 59.1% 47.4%

Theft 3.7% 5.0% 4.5% 3.3%

Litigation .9% 5.0% 2.5% 1.9%g

Lose work 5.0% 4.5% 1.4%

Dowry 2.8% 2.5% 1.9%

Others 8.4% 2.5% 4.8%

107 40 40 22 209

Crisis Coping Mechanism of Different Land Holding Size

Total

Landle Margin Sm Mediuss al all m

Using Saving 28.4 35.9 46.2 63.6 36.8

Borrowing from relatives, well wishers and friends

9.2 23.1 2.6 4.5 10.0

Sale of permanent asset 5.5 7.7 10.2 0 6.2

Taking Credit money lender 3.7 2.6 - - 2.4

Taking Credit from other source 45 0 28 2 41 0 22 7 38Taking Credit from other source 45.0 28.2 41.0 22.7 38.8

Giving Mortgage of Asset - 2.6 - 4.5 1.0

Other 8.3 4.5 4.8

Use and Application

The Ward Information Book prepared under LLPMS isnow with the Union Parishad The functionaries ofnow with the Union Parishad. The functionaries oflocal government consult the WIB for identificationof beneficiaries and the non-governmentorganisations are requested to use this informationBook. The potential uses of this WIB needsgovernment directives and for that reasons advocaygo e e t d ect es a d o t at easo s ad ocayare being continued for the formulation of WIB inother Union.

Status of Implementation and Next Steps

BARD is providing consultancy support to prepare aBARD is providing consultancy support to prepare aDatabase using Natural Resource Database at thepoverty stricken areas of Bangladesh utilizing the

i th h LLPMSexperiences through LLPMS.

Lessons Learnt

Involving relevant nation-building departments inth f CBMS ld f ilit t t li t ththe process of CBMS would facilitate to replicate thesystem quickly.

The indicators should be developed considering theThe indicators should be developed considering theneed and capacity of the local people. The indicatorsmay vary from one area to another according to thenature of problems.

The local government unit should be involved in thef CBMS F l i th l lprocess of CBMS. For planning purpose the local

government unit having resources can be madefocal point.

Integration of CBMS GIS is very essential forIntegration of CBMS _GIS is very essential formaking advocacy effective. The output of theCBMS can be made visible to the policy plannerby using NRDB, which is also a value addition ofexisting poverty monitoring system.

D fi iti f i di t d t b l ifi dDefinition of every indicator needs to be clarifiedbefore conducting the survey. Data collectionneeds to be completed within a specific period oftime for using as reference year.

For generating employment related informationseasonality exercise through PRA may give morereliable information at the grassroots level.

P t it i b i l i l l l d

Conclusion

Poverty monitoring by involving local people andlocal government at the grassroots level is achallenging task. There might be academic debateg g gwith the capacity of local people and reliability ofinformation generated through local people. But, theexperiences show that for programming purpose theexperiences show that for programming purpose theinitiative is very much well accepted.

The main learning from the research project is thatthe local government unit at the grassroots level l cand th t k f t it i ith th h l fdo the task of poverty monitoring with the help oflocal people and field functionaries of developmentorganizations if they are provided support. Theg y p ppquality of information generated would be improvedfurther by practicing the process.